Welcome to the forums and thanks for your post. I especially enjoyed the reference material you cited. lol. Let me say at the outset that the numbers game can be skewed many ways and, in the long run, simply isn't too productive, except it gives us some stuff to banter about. That said, allow some data input.

Clearly the old '06 superceeds the new fangled 7RM, but, does it really?

Your best response is that the BC of these bullets will give an edge at longer ranges in terms of energy and that would be correct. But, it is only a marginal advantage, just as the ft/lb energy rating advantage of the '06 is marginal. But, what happens when we change a few approaches and instead of using ft/lb we compare with Taylor Knock Down Power, another valid and respected measure of effectiveness. Care to guess?

OK OK, maybe I was harsh in calling the 7RM a superb varmint rifle, afterall, it has been known to kill antelope and small deer as well, right? And, it better be used at longer ranges because with all that muzzle flash from such an overbore beast, one could actually set the poor game's hair on fire!! In fact, in some areas (don't ask me which), spark arrestors are required on any 7RM!! I am glad you like your 7RM and I sincerely hope your hearing hasn't been damaged too much by it.

But, like our frequent poster and forum friends says, "Keep It Coming". I like that phrase. But, enough of this chit chat about the 7 Rem Mag, afterall, 2012 looms and we may have more important things about which to be concerned.

#32: Re: 7mm Remington Mag good od bad? Author: d_hoffman, Location: Chillicothe, OhioPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:29 pm ----You better read again. Look at the ballistic table in any Remington book, and they use 24" barrels for both. The 7 mag is hands down leader in velocity, energy and trajectory. This taken directly off Remingtons site, no edits.

Note: These ballistics reflected a test barrel length of 24" except those for 30 Carbine and 44 Remington Magnum which are 20" barrels.
Specifications are nominal. Ballistics figures established in test barrels. Individual rifles may vary from test barrel results.
â€œzeroâ€ indicates yardage at which rifle was sighted in.
* Inches above or below line of sight. Hold low for positive numbers, high for negative numbers.
1 Bullet does not rise more than 1" above line of sight from muzzle to sighting-in range.
2 Bullet does not rise more than 3" above line of sight from muzzle to sighting-in range.
â€ 280 Remington and 7mm Express Remington are interchangeable.
â€¡ 6mm Remington and 244 Remington are interchangeable.

#34: Re: 7mm Remington Mag good od bad? Author: Handloader, Location: Phoenix, ArizonaPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:33 am ----d_hoffman: now that's more like it! Numbers, good solid numbers and from Remington no less -- oh that's the company that introduced it, right?
No matter, it serves only to balance the equation and brings us back to the point and salient question --- do you really believe it matters between the two cartridges? (I say "yes") If so, under what circumstances?

Oh, here's another question to ponder, and this relates to versatility. If you were encountering a mean ole brown bear intent on doing you permanent damage and you could grab your 7RM or the '06 next to it, your choice of bullets, which would you prefer? Why?

Part of my perspective and opinionated position is based on eight years of guiding elk hunters and seeing the performance from various cartridges. Hey, the 7RM will do OK, no doubt, but the '06 was always the more welcomed rifle and had a significantly better record of putting those big boys down. Since the ft/lb energy of the two cartridges is, basically, equal with a slight edge to the '06, something other than ft/lbs is making the difference in terminal performance of the bullet. That's why in a previous post I mentioned the Taylor Knockdown factor. I'll look up some data for comparison sake and we can chew on that a bit.

Grant: congratulations on Bullwinkle. That's a lot of meat for sure. Which bullet, what distance, how many shots? Spread?

My own 7RM is in a Ruger No1S. I've owned two others over the years, along with a 7X61, which I still own, and a STW, now rebarreled. I've killed deer, antelope and elk with them but noted that they did nothing better than the old 7X57 (Ruger No1A) or the 7-08, 308, 300 Savage or (hold on) the '06. Too much loss of good meat with the 7 Magnums and no more deadly a kill. I saw an entire elk hind quarter wasted recently with another Remington cartridge, the 7RUM using a premium bullet (TSX) -- the shot was around 40 yards. That leads in to another subject, the "best" velocity for hunting rounds, but, not tonight.

#36: Re: 7mm Remington Mag good od bad? Author: hunter63, Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:28 am ----My 2 cents,
With all the numbers being tossed around here, I still don't think there will ever be an agreement.
Handloader, you like the '06, I don't. Then again I don't like the .308 either.
That's why they make so many different cartridges.

My 2 cents,
With all the numbers being tossed around here, I still don't think there will ever be an agreement.
Handloader, you like the '06, I don't. Then again I don't like the .308 either.
That's why they make so many different cartridges.

I like a .308 for target and competition. I would say that you couldn't give me an '06 but there again I could use it to trade for a 7 mag.

A little more research done, cape buffalo have been killed with a 7 mag. Can 30-06 claim that?

Yep, sure can........... I think it's safe to say that there isn't anything on the planet that hasn't been taken with a .30-06. It is still the caliber most every other new or old caliber is compared to and if I was only allowed to have one center fire gun, the .30-06 would be the one. Thankfully we aren't limited.

Quote::

CAPE BUFFALO HUNTING TIPS â€“ What is the best caliber to use?

Cape Buffalo are thick-skinned animals and the minimum safe caliber is the .375 Magnum. Many people have killed Buffalo with a well placed shot from .270s and 30-06's, one old frontiersman even claimed a head shot with a .22 hornet. However, with Buffalo you can never have too much gun. Today's hunter prefers the large bore double rifles (if you can afford it) as most shots are less than 50 yards and in heavy cover.

-> 30-06 Springfield (Famous person to use it Earnest Hemingway with a Griffin & Howe sporized 1903 Springfield)
-> 303British (Stands to reason as its was the common round because of the British in Africa)
-> 7x57mm Mauser (the Boers used them and made it a common African round, W.D.M. Bell)
-> 240Weatherby Mag (Roy Weatherby)
-> 6.5mm Rounds (6.5x54mm Mannlicher-Schoenauer and 6.5x55mm Mauser etc) (WDM Bell)
-> 270Win

#41: Re: 7mm Remington Mag good od bad? Author: Handloader, Location: Phoenix, ArizonaPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 9:30 pm ----This isn't an argument to be won or lost. It shows different approaches to the same objective -- taking big game and has lead to a spirited and respectful discussion. d_hoffman has championed the 7RM and is enthused about its capability. I admire his passion for the round, whereas, I have tried to present some counterpoints that I believe to be valid and poked some fun here and there.

d_hoffman believes that numbers don't lie, (this in reference to Remington's published ballistics), however, my observation is that factory numbers are exaggerated and best verified by chronograph. My experiece in chronographing various cartridges underscores how good the 7RM is as a cartridge but defaults to the "real" world conclusion that the '06 is the more powerful of the two in terms of ft/lbs which priortizes velocity, velocity verified by actual chronographing of factory loads but only in a few rifles.

Averaging the maximum velocities listed in Lyman 48, Nosler #4, Hornady #7 and Speer, gives their test numbers for a more valid comparison, but, this time let's put aside ft/lbs and calculate the Taylor Knockdown Power, another respected measure of cartridge/bullet performance. While ft/lbs prioitizes kinectic energy, the Taylor index favors mass and caliber. Using that index here is a comparison of three cartridges:

7mmRemMag
160gr 3,000fps 19.47 Taylor
175gr 2,950 20.90

30-06
180gr 2,800 22.18
200gr 2,600 22.88

45-70 (strong action)
350gr 2,300 52.67
400gr 2,100 54.96

Well now, that throws a different light on the matter! If we accept that the 7RM is a good field gun, then by Taylor's numbers we have to accord higher praise to the '06, but, look at that ole 45-70!! Wow. And, yes, trajectories, bullet construction and a host of other variables also must be considered and that's the fun of this thread.

But, my best observation is "let's go hunting!" I'll bring the '06 and d_hoffman can bring his little 7RM and we will all have a good time, shoot some game and tell good stories around the campfire.

#44: Re: 7mm Remington Mag good od bad? Author: d_hoffman, Location: Chillicothe, OhioPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 11:10 pm ----But, my best observation is "let's go hunting!" I'll bring the '06 and d_hoffman can bring his little 7RM and we will all have a good time, shoot some game and tell good stories around the campfire.